Tusmo Jama Beta
Read this first — limitations.
- Patterns reflect published decisions only.
- This is not an assessment of private character, integrity or bias.
- Outcome distributions are per case-type and not comparable across courts/years.
- Based on 16 decision(s); small samples are indicative only.
- Name normalization is automatic and may merge or split judges incorrectly.
Main subject areas
Activity
Published decisions from 2019 to 2022; busiest year 2020 (7 decisions).
Documented outcomes by case type
- Civil: Affirmed (2); The court finds for the Claimant and orders the Respondent t (1); The claim is dismissed. (1); The Respondents are found to have disclosed the Claimant’s H (1)
- Employment and Labour: Affirmed (1)
- HIV and AIDS: The court found in favor of the Claimant. (1)
- HIV and AIDS Prevention and Control Act: The cause is dismissed with no orders as to costs (1)
- HIV and AIDS Tribunal: In favor of the Claimant (1)
Counts are per published decision as classified by AI; not comparable across courts or years.
Most-cited legislation
- HIV and AIDS Prevention and Control Act, 2006 (6)
- HIV & AIDS Prevention and Control Act, 2006 (3)
- Constitution of Kenya (2)
- Privacy Act (1)
- HIV and AIDS Prevention and Control Act, Cap 246A (1)
- HIV and AIDS Prevention and Control Act 2011 (HAPCA) (1)
- HIV and AIDS Prevention & Control Act, 2006 (1)
- HIV and AIDS Prevention and Control Act (1)
Documented reasoning patterns
- Most common procedural postures: Appeal from the original trial (5), Appeal from a previous decision (2), Appeal from an original trial (2)
- [HIV and AIDS] outcomes — The court found in favor of the Claimant.: 1/1
- [Civil] outcomes — Affirmed: 2/9, The claim is dismissed.: 1/9, The court finds for the Claimant and orders the Respondent to pay the Claimant's costs.: 1/9, The Respondents are found to have disclosed the Claimant’s HIV status without her consent and to have caused stigmatization and harassment.: 1/9
- [HIV and AIDS Prevention and Control Act] outcomes — The cause is dismissed with no orders as to costs: 1/1
- [HIV and AIDS Tribunal] outcomes — In favor of the Claimant: 1/1
- [HIV & AIDS Discrimination Case] outcomes — The Respondent was ordered to pay damages for the impairment of dignity, emotional, physical and psychological suffering.: 1/1
Writing characteristics
- Median judgment length ~25502 words
- Includes panel decisions
Remedy patterns
- General damages (2)
- Declaration of disclosure (1)
- Damages for testing the Claimant without her consent (1)
- Damages for testing the Claimant without pre-test or post-test counselling (1)
- Damages for the breach of confidentiality, unlawful disclosure, impairment of dignity, emotional and psychological suffering (1)
Citation patterns
- Avg cited authorities/decision: 1.5
- Frequently applied statutes: HIV and AIDS Prevention and Control Act, 2006 (6), HIV & AIDS Prevention and Control Act, 2006 (3), Constitution of Kenya (2), Privacy Act (1), HIV and AIDS Prevention and Control Act, Cap 246A (1)
Sample decisions
SNW v AG [2019] KEHAT 20 (KLR)
KEHAT · [2019] KEHAT 20 (KLR)
MCM v BOO [2019] KEHAT 28 (KLR)
KEHAT · [2019] KEHAT 28 (KLR) · 29 November 2019
SNW v Asha Gulam [2019] KEHAT 69 (KLR)
KEHAT · [2019] KEHAT 69 (KLR)
M A O v S M & H M [2020] KEHAT 101 (KLR)
KEHAT · [2020] KEHAT 101 (KLR) · 26 May 2020
EOD v OC & another [2020] KEHAT 110 (KLR)
KEHAT · [2020] KEHAT 110 (KLR) · 4 May 2020
SM v ENA [2020] KEHAT 145 (KLR)
KEHAT · [2020] KEHAT 145 (KLR)
M.A.O v S. M & another [2020] KEHAT 17 (KLR)
KEHAT · [2020] KEHAT 17 (KLR) · 26 May 2020
RAO v MGH & 2 others [2020] KEHAT 39 (KLR)
KEHAT · [2020] KEHAT 39 (KLR) · 27 November 2020
JK v AAR Healthcare Kenya Ltd [2020] KEHAT 40 (KLR)
KEHAT · [2020] KEHAT 40 (KLR) · 6 November 2020
J K v AAR Healthcare Kenya Ltd [2020] KEHAT 44 (KLR)
KEHAT · [2020] KEHAT 44 (KLR)